> S3 has recently been launched in Europe, although TBH it still seems > slow. On some applications S3 delivery is so slow that we've had to > use Akamai. The big problem with that is the massive price difference > between S3 and Akamai bandwidth.
S3 was never really meant to be used as a CDN, it appears. Try their CloudFront -- much better. And vs other CDN services, their pricing is quite competitive. http://aws.amazon.com/cloudfront/ Not sure if it is a US only thing, but they have POP throughout Europe, so I don't see why not. On Jan 31, 2009, at 3:58 PM, Lee Bolding wrote: > > EC2 has only recently got an SLA. > > I haven't had time to investigate the SLA document thoroughly yet, but > even so I'm happy to stick apps on EC2 because nothing I currently > work on is mission critical. In the context we were discussing I'd be > a bit more skeptical. > > S3 has recently been launched in Europe, although TBH it still seems > slow. On some applications S3 delivery is so slow that we've had to > use Akamai. The big problem with that is the massive price difference > between S3 and Akamai bandwidth. > > The Amazon services look great, but they need a little more lovin' > yet. > > On 31 Jan 2009, at 22:31, John L. Singleton wrote: > >> >>> >>> On Jan 31, 2009, at 4:34 PM, Lee Bolding wrote: >>>> Last year (or it may be the year before now...) there were several >>>> cases of hosting centres loosing power, and the backup generators >>>> failing because they were never tested. >>> >>> >>> The data center I was at was one of those. They lost power, the UPS >>> took over like it was supposed to. The generator started and took >>> over like it was supposed to. When it was time to switch back to >>> mains power; *pop* the main breaker popped and power was lost. >>> AFAIK, >>> this was the first time the generator was tested under load. >>> >>> They also had the power company come out to switch meters. The >>> meter >>> *exploded* and sent a guy to the hospital (he was OK). Again, all >>> servers in the center went down hard. >>> >>> Another data center I've used switches to the generator *every* >>> Friday. Which is good. Bad part is they don't have enough UPS >>> capacity for the entire data center - you have to provide your own >>> or >>> just accept that your servers will reboot every Friday at the same >>> time. >>> >> >> Ditto that. I had a project at Alchemy (where MySpace hosts here in >> LA) and there was a massive power outage. The generators kicked in, >> but someone borked something with the fuses that handled the circuit >> to our cage. Fuse gone. Site down. No spare fuses on hand. UPS >> drained. Bad times. You get the picture. Though almost killing >> someone >> is a little more dramatic ;) >> >> While we are talking about it, I thought I'd throw in that Amazon's >> EC2 is a great environment for clustering. Reason being that for >> comparatively little money you get access to a huge infrastructure >> that would cost many many dollars to build yourself. As a simple >> example, EC2 allows you to create snapshots of your XFS volumes (such >> as a mysql database) and persist the deltas redundantly to S3. >> Considering how important backups are that's a good reason to >> consider >> EC2. Rolling something like that yourself would cost a fortune. Ie, >> you make backups to a different machine, fine, but what if that >> machine fails? What's backing up your backup? As Jacob pointed out, >> there are two reasons to backup, really. The first is just protecting >> against failures leading to data loss. Backups with things like RAID >> help with this. The second is to protect against, you know, malicious >> or erroneous things, like hackers, or accidently running a rm -f * on >> your data directory. RAID ain't gonna help you here. But again, I >> don't know the level of redundancy, liability protection, and traffic >> your site requires. Something to think about... >> >> >> >> On Jan 31, 2009, at 2:11 PM, Jacob Coby wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Jan 31, 2009, at 4:34 PM, Lee Bolding wrote: >>>> Last year (or it may be the year before now...) there were several >>>> cases of hosting centres loosing power, and the backup generators >>>> failing because they were never tested. >>> >>> >>> The data center I was at was one of those. They lost power, the UPS >>> took over like it was supposed to. The generator started and took >>> over like it was supposed to. When it was time to switch back to >>> mains power; *pop* the main breaker popped and power was lost. >>> AFAIK, >>> this was the first time the generator was tested under load. >>> >>> They also had the power company come out to switch meters. The >>> meter >>> *exploded* and sent a guy to the hospital (he was OK). Again, all >>> servers in the center went down hard. >>> >>> Another data center I've used switches to the generator *every* >>> Friday. Which is good. Bad part is they don't have enough UPS >>> capacity for the entire data center - you have to provide your own >>> or >>> just accept that your servers will reboot every Friday at the same >>> time. >>> >>> -- >>> Jacob Coby >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >> >> >>> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "symfony users" group. To post to this group, send email to symfony-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to symfony-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/symfony-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
